Has anyone ridden with 700cc x 48mm gravel tires? (Even better, if you've ridden the Rene Herse Oracle Ridges, b/c that's what I am considering.) I am riding the 125 mile UnPAved gravel race/ride (really a ride for me) in October, for the second time. I am curious about trying a larger volume tire to ride at lower pressure and increase comfort over this very long day. There is one particularly brutal section on the ride, the Longwell Draft grade B road, a section less than 20 miles but it's super rough with lots of big rocks, a long climb and a long descent, and it's very whole-body physically taxing (and it is right in the middle of the ride). I am wondering about the tradeoff between the extra comfort from the larger volume vs. the sludgier handling and the speed penalty on the flat and short paved sections. Any guidance is greatly appreciated! I do have a pair of the 42mm cousins of the RH Oracles (the Hurricane Ridges), and I do like them quite a bit. Last year I rode IRC Boken 40mm's. They did just fine but they're not real plush. Thanks in advance, John in Bloomsburg, PA
If it's just a ride for you, I would choose comfort over speed. A less exhausted you will have more at the end. I run 650 x 47b's for this reason. I'm not competitive, so not looking for the last watt, but they sure are nice in the rough stuff.
I went to 650b's because as the 700c's got bigger and bigger the handling of the bike got different and I didn't like it. The bike (Gen 4 Warbird) actually handles better with the smaller wheels.
I've used 48 mm Soma SV and Shikoro (measure 52 and 51 mm on my rims) and 45 mm Pirelli Cinturato Gravel H (measures 49 mm on my rims). On rough surfaces these are definitely more comfortable and faster than smaller tires. They do add weight, raise your BB, and change handling. As mtbnut87 mentioned reducing the diameter will mitigate the BB height and handling issues.
On smoother surfaces big tires will be slower, not because they're big but because nobody makes really fast tires over 32 mm. And they'll be slower still if you run them at low pressures for comfort.
It is a mistake to to assume that bigger tires will be slower. Sure, if you are comparing them to fast, slick road tires that can be run at high pressure on smooth roads then yes, they will be slower. Here is an example: According to the BRR site a 32mm gp5000 TL at 60 psi rolls at 10.3 watts. But to me, that is still too high for gravel. I would chose 45-50 psi and I have done that and it is an acceptable gravel tire. If you guess the lower pressure 5000 is now closer to 11 watts then you have a frame of comparison. The Conti RaceKing Protection is 20.something at 25 psi which is really more like 17.5 when run tubeless. So you have a 6.5 watt per tire delta. However, when you compare available large volume gravel tires to the RaceKing it gets very close. The fastest at 40mm could be considered Challenge Strada Bianca Pro HTLR which would be about 16.5 watts tubeless when run at 35 psi. So now you have a very small difference between the fastest available gravel tire and the RaceKing. I ride the RaceKing on gravel and only really feel at a disadvantage when I hit a steep and/or long paved section. Then again, my gravel machine is a dual-sus converted xc bike so it has a few disadvantages when climbing paved. Now, if the RaceKing won't fit your bike then your options are less desireable. The RH tire you mention is not the slowest tire, but it can't touch the better gravel or MTB tires that are available. I just picked up a pair of Schwalbe Furious Fred's that measure about 45mm and they feel pretty fast with Liteskin construction and Speed Addix (which is much faster than the Speedgrip Addix). They are supposed to be 2.0 but are a good 5mm short of that.
I frequently run 700x48 Soma Supple Vitesses like Stu mentioned. They're great if you have 75mm of BB drop, but if you have 70mm of drop or more they feel weird in the turns. Still, cycling is 99% going in a straight line.
Volsung, My Warbird (current generation) has 70mm of drop and already feels very straight-line-preferring (that's a terrible way of phrasing that, but anyway) so wider tires (meaning even wider than 42mm) might indeed push it even farther into that realm. Thanks.
ccand51997 wrote:It is a mistake to to assume that bigger tires will be slower. Sure, if you are comparing them to fast, slick road tires that can be run at high pressure on smooth roads then yes, they will be slower. Here is an example: According to the BRR site a 32mm gp5000 TL at 60 psi rolls at 10.3 watts. But to me, that is still too high for gravel. I would chose 45-50 psi and I have done that and it is an acceptable gravel tire. If you guess the lower pressure 5000 is now closer to 11 watts then you have a frame of comparison. The Conti RaceKing Protection is 20.something at 25 psi which is really more like 17.5 when run tubeless. So you have a 6.5 watt per tire delta. However, when you compare available large volume gravel tires to the RaceKing it gets very close. The fastest at 40mm could be considered Challenge Strada Bianca Pro HTLR which would be about 16.5 watts tubeless when run at 35 psi. So now you have a very small difference between the fastest available gravel tire and the RaceKing. I ride the RaceKing on gravel and only really feel at a disadvantage when I hit a steep and/or long paved section. Then again, my gravel machine is a dual-sus converted xc bike so it has a few disadvantages when climbing paved. Now, if the RaceKing won't fit your bike then your options are less desireable. The RH tire you mention is not the slowest tire, but it can't touch the better gravel or MTB tires that are available. I just picked up a pair of Schwalbe Furious Fred's that measure about 45mm and they feel pretty fast with Liteskin construction and Speed Addix (which is much faster than the Speedgrip Addix). They are supposed to be 2.0 but are a good 5mm short of that.
I concur with this sentiment. You can be faster in rough conditions with a bigger tire. Fast is a subjective term. Fast on the road is different than fast on the dirt. 20+mph is fast to me on the road. Getting up the hill without dying on the dirt is fast to me as well.
I have the Rene Hearse knobby endurance versions in 48 mm and 55 mm 700c. They are fantastic. I'm not a racer it record my rides. The bigger tires are faster for more off road and more difficult riding. They are very predictable and don't feel like a penalty on pavement except for the bigger tires having sort of a terminal velocity feel trying to go fast.
For bigger 700c/29 I've run RaceKings, MSO (Donnelley/Clement) and the two Rene Hearse sizes. I wonder if the people who espouse the RaceKings must not have tried the MSOs or RH knobbies. They're all good but the RH knobbies have predictability the RaceKings don't have. MSOs roll with more ease on pavement than RaceKings. All those - RaceKings, MSOs, RH knobby - are good. The RH advantage is super predictable, capable and comfy with seemingly no disadvantage for any weight, bulk or the knobs.
With my two sizes experience with RH knobby tires, I will guess @EdsalRoams with the 42 mm versions can extrapolate or predict what I think will be more comfy and predictable version of same.
Unpaved has some long climbs. You absolutely will notice the heavier tires on those climbs. The larger diameter of the tires is also going to make your gear ratios higher making it harder to climb, so if possible you might want to adjust your cassette or chainring sizes. I run 1x so I typically use a chainring that is two teeth smaller to compensate for the larger tires.
The difference in diameter between a 48 mm Oracle Ridge and a 42 mm Hurricane Ridge is about 1 part in 60. The 48 mm is only 30 g more (per tire), with my 90 kg total that's only 1 part in 1500. With such small differences I certainly wouldn't notice the extra weight, I probably wouldn't think the gearing and handling changed much, and I certainly would appreciate the extra comfort.
But comparing a 48 mm Oracle Ridge to a 32 mm GP5000 I'd notice everything.
stu wrote:The difference in diameter between a 48 mm Oracle Ridge and a 42 mm Hurricane Ridge is about 1 part in 60. The 48 mm is only 30 g more (per tire), with my 90 kg total that's only 1 part in 1500. With such small differences I certainly wouldn't notice the extra weight, I probably wouldn't think the gearing and handling changed much, and I certainly would appreciate the extra comfort.
But comparing a 48 mm Oracle Ridge to a 32 mm GP5000 I'd notice everything.
He said he was going from 40s to 48s. If you don’t find that a noticeable difference in weight or diameter than awesome for you! I find a huge difference swapping from 40s to 48s and I think most people will.
ljsmith wrote:He said he was going from 40s to 48s. If you don’t find that a noticeable difference in weight or diameter than awesome for you! I find a huge difference swapping from 40s to 48s and I think most people will.
I misread the original post, on closer examination it looks like the poster was comparing 48 mm to both 40 mm and 42 mm.
I noticed differences in comfort and speed between Soma SV in 42 mm and 48 mm on rough surfaces. On the same wheels with the same gears I did not notice differences in weight or diameter but I thought the 42 mm handled better on smooth pavement.
Comparing a 40 mm GK+ or G-One to a 48 mm Soma Shikoro is another matter. The Shikoro adds 200 to 300 g per tire and is noticeably stiffer so it feels very different.
My gravel lite tire setup is 38mm SS f+r. My fully gravel setup is the Panaracer made 700x50mm Soma Caz tires f+r. The Caz are so good and comfortable on rough stuff, but good enough due to width & diameter for good traction & climbing.
I realize that I am late to this posting, but I recently returned from multiple gravel rides in Colorado including SBT grvl using 650 B 47 mm Ventures. I am not an not a real racer but ride for the atmosphere and fun. Though I was noticeably slower on the easy smooth gravel, when It got gnarly, as with single track and rougher gravel, I really felt a difference and was more comfortable with riding faster. Also, I agree with an earlier post that my bike ( jazzed up Salsa Journeymen) handles very well with 650 B except for potential for pedal strikes on roots and rocks in nasty terrain. I suspect that riding 700 C and the near 50 mm tires will feel sloppy and sluggish. I do run 42 mm Resolutes on this bike also and think that is near ideal for 700 C and this kind of riding.
I'll throw in my $.02; my favorite ride is all gravel and at times of the 50 miles or so, most of it is pretty smooth most of the time. That said, at times it can have some sections that become pretty rough if it rains or during the protracted dry times here in Az. Given that, I have tried 44mm WTB Byways, 50mm GK-SK's, 50mm WTB Ventures and currently Pirelli Centurato H's in 45mm. I find that smaller tires provide a much more harsh ride when the conditions are rough. My fastest times have been with 50mm GK-SK's. All of that said, I think the one thing not being talked about here is how much you weigh. I weigh 180#. I find the ride quality of bigger tires to be so much better that I can't imagine going to smaller tires which would require higher pressure. That said, if you are significantly lighter than I am, you would be able to ride smaller tires with relatively low pressures. I also like the added rim protection of a wider tire/lower pressure. Also, given that you out for fun and simply getting to the finish line, I'd say get bigger tires and I think you'll find yourself glad you did. Getting hammered for ~20 miles sounds horrible to me; I think surviving that stretch with a smile will make for a better experience.
EdselRoams wrote:Has anyone ridden with 700cc x 48mm gravel tires? (Even better, if you've ridden the Rene Herse Oracle Ridges, b/c that's what I am considering.) I am riding the 125 mile UnPAved gravel race/ride (really a ride for me) in October, for the second time. I am curious about trying a larger volume tire to ride at lower pressure and increase comfort over this very long day. There is one particularly brutal section on the ride, the Longwell Draft grade B road, a section less than 20 miles but it's super rough with lots of big rocks, a long climb and a long descent, and it's very whole-body physically taxing (and it is right in the middle of the ride). I am wondering about the tradeoff between the extra comfort from the larger volume vs. the sludgier handling and the speed penalty on the flat and short paved sections. Any guidance is greatly appreciated! I do have a pair of the 42mm cousins of the RH Oracles (the Hurricane Ridges), and I do like them quite a bit. Last year I rode IRC Boken 40mm's. They did just fine but they're not real plush. Thanks in advance, John in Bloomsburg, PA
Revisiting this, in spring I did a 142 my ride that was a race for some and a drinking club with a bike problem for others. There was a 47 mi section of rough ATV trail. A few times I wish I had a faster rig but two of us with the RH knobby tires between most tour/gravel or the fat bikers thought we had secret weapons. You'd see some people weaving all over for their right line or getting out of their seats when others were just riding along.
Last night I pedaled the 48 mm and 55 mm RH on different bikes. It occurred my past 2.5 months with 40 mm tires have mostly been about adding more pavement, speed and distance but the bigger tires are definitely the way to go for survival and tough going.
